Mahato loses right to address
court in MPs bribery case
Shailendra Mahato has surrendered his right to address the court
on framing of charges in the MPs bribery case, sticking to his
decision to turn an approver.
On being told by Special Judge Ajit Bharihoke, holding trial in
the case, that he would not get a chance to defend the charge
against him before framing of charges even if his application,
filed on Monday, seeking to turn an approver was rejected, the
former Jharkhand Mukti Morcha MP said he did not mind it.
Former prime minister P V Narasimha Rao and 20 others, including
Mahato, have been named as accused by the CBI in the case relating
to alleged payment of Rs 5 million each as briber to 11 opposition
MPs who voted against the no-confidence motion against the Rao
government on July 28, 1993.
The other accused include three JMM leaders, former federal ministers
Buta Singh, Ajit Singh, Ramlakhan Singh Yadav and Satish Sharma
and former chief ministers Bhajan Lal of Haryana and M Veerappa
Moily of Karnataka.
Additional Sessions Judge Ajit Bharihoke said in his order that
the court could admit the request of Mahato for turning an approver
only if it was satisfied that he was ready to disclose the entire
facts relating to this case which would be helpful in just adjudication
of the matter.
''In order to arrive at this conclusion it is necessary to go
through the entire chargesheet with a view to ascertain whether
the facts mentioned in the application of Shailendra Mahato are
true and correct narration of the incident.''
Earlier in the day, arguments against framing of charges were
advanced by Alok Aggarwal, counsel for the three JMM leaders -
Suraj Mandal, Shibu Soren, MP, and Simon Marandi.
With this, arguments on charges are pending only in the case of
accused Ramlakhan Singh Yadav, Ram Sharan Yadav and Bhajan Lal
which are expected to take place on Wednesday.
Counsel Aggarwal said the three chargesheets filed by the Central
Bureau of Investigation were severely self-contradictory as alleged
bribes to his clients were stated to have been paid on July 29
while the relevant amount was taken from an hotel to one of their
residences the next day.
The types of vehicles, stated to have carried the money from the
hotel, and those which reached the residence were also different.
All this showed that the CBI had merely fabricated the case at
the instance of a political party to damage the reputation of
the then ruling Congress and the JMM, he argued.
UNI
|
